Sustainability is dead – true or false?
Myths abound when it comes to corporate sustainability. Can you tell fact from fiction? Test your knowledge on the common misconceptions here....
Sustainability
Save the planet or the economy? Getting the balance right
Published October 22, 2025 in Sustainability • 5 min read • 
Audio available
Many C-suite executives are torn between the need for a green transition and maintaining a competitive advantage. Here are five ways to find a clear path ahead.
The C-suite journey is riddled with trade-offs between sustainability, growth, profitability, and geopolitics. Executives are tasked with steering organizations through uncertainty and making climate-aligned decisions that are economically viable and competitively advantageous. Bloomberg Media’s Energy Transition Report, based on a study of 9,000-plus global business leaders, including C-suites, reveals a compelling but complex picture. Most executives agree that the energy transition is not happening fast enough, but that agreement doesn’t translate to alignment on solutions.
Based on the report, we understand that 90% of business leaders prioritize economic growth and job creation when evaluating climate-related proposals, but 90% also believe in protecting the environment for future generations. The study reveals that 66% of financial and banking leaders believe the transition must accelerate. Yet, 65% of all leaders still see oil and gas as essential to the global economy in 25 years. These apparent contradictions suggest executives recognize that sustainability goals cannot be achieved in isolation from business performance. The pressure to drive transformation while delivering shareholder value is intensifying.
A segmentation analysis, based on our study, reveals three distinct leadership mindsets when it comes to the energy transition:
- Save the planet (39%): Environment-first champions driving green innovation.
- Save the economy (26%): Leaders prioritizing economic stability.
- It’s complicated (35%): A C-suite segment caught in the middle.
The third segment consists of predominantly C-suite decision-makers who hold a dual ambition: to lead sustainable transformation and protect profitability. This segment is the most conflicted and most influential. They are not resistant to change and are keen to act responsibly. They seek clarity, evidence, and a framework for action that is credible and grounded in commercial objectives. They are the largest segment in the US (39%) and Asia Pacific (38%), and the second largest in Western Europe (32%).
In Western Europe, often considered a frontrunner in the energy transition, the size of the ‘Save the economy’ segment (28%) is larger than in the US (23%) and Asia Pacific (25%), which underscores the region’s dual pressures and highlights the divisive nature of energy transition.
Geopolitical and economic headwinds: the reality check
To further complicate the task facing C-suite executives, strategic planning for the energy transition is challenged by factors beyond the boardroom. These include:
- Geopolitical instability. From Europe’s political uncertainty to China’s green tech dominance, energy decisions are increasingly political. For example, the UK’s Labour Party cut projected green investment plans by half, even before it was elected to power. In the US, conservative resistance threatens tax incentives for clean energy. And the US and the European Union are pushing back against China’s dominance in supplying low-cost green technologies, further disrupting global supply chains.
- Financing hurdles. High interest rates and grid bottlenecks slow project execution. In the US, there are long waiting lists to connect new energy sources to the grid.
- Technology readiness gaps. From hydrogen to storage, scalability remains elusive. Technologies for storing renewable energy remain inefficient, and clean hydrogen is still prohibitively expensive. According to BloombergNEF, clean hydrogen costs four times more than hydrogen from natural gas.
- AI’s energy burden. The rise of AI presents another paradox. Data centers, essential to powering AI, are energy-intensive. A recent Bloomberg Markets article pointed out that AI alone may consume 8% of US power by 2030. This surge is reviving fossil fuel use, with over 200 gas plants in development across the US.
- Communication challenges. A Bloomberg Intelligence study found that 75% of senior leaders cite greenwashing concerns. Many are now opting for reducing public disclosure, or “greenhushing”. Research from the climate solutions organization South Pole shows that, while 81% of companies recognize the value of communicating net-zero ambitions, 58% are reducing external communications due to backlash fears and messaging complexity.
This complex landscape calls for pragmatic leadership – not just ambition, but operational strategy as well. For business leaders navigating uncertainty, clarity enables better decision-making, mitigates reputational risk, and positions organizations to lead rather than follow.
How can C-suites turn energy transition into a competitive edge?
According to Bloomberg Media’s ESG Compass Study, corporate leadership is the driving factor that most positively impacts the adoption of sustainability among organizations. C-suites have a crucial role to play in the energy transition. To seize this opportunity, leaders should consider five guiding principles.
- Focus on data for accurate guidance. A major roadblock to implementing energy transition measures is the lack of data to gauge the impact. Equip your teams with measurement tools and evidence-based, data-led insights that challenge persistent misconceptions, especially around cost and reliability. This helps remove barriers to internal buy-in and investor confidence.
- Surface sector-specific innovation. As Bloomberg Media’s ESG Compass Study shows, technological innovation is one of the key factors that positively impact the adoption of sustainability initiatives. Move beyond generalities and showcase how renewable and low-carbon solutions are already being successfully deployed in your industry, whether in heavy materials, transportation, or digital infrastructure.
- Make the business case front and center. The study further highlights that the main driver for sustainability initiatives in an organization is now customer demand as opposed to regulatory compliance, as it was in 2022. Highlight how the energy transition creates economic opportunity for your organization. Work with financial stakeholders to underscore how the energy transition aligns with increasing sales, profitability, operational efficiency, and long-term value creation.
- Reframe policy as a partnership. Interpret complex regulatory environments through a strategic lens. Demonstrate how public-private collaboration can accelerate progress and unlock shared value, even amid policy shifts. A great example of this is the UK’s offshore wind program, which has delivered tangible environmental and economic benefits. Scottish Power, a UK offshore wind energy company, reported a 12% increase in its earnings before interest and tax for 2024, while providing green electricity to its customers. The economic benefit of its investments is also being felt across the UK supply chain, involving 19 companies and leading to the creation of employment opportunities.
- Elevate proof of impact via radical transparency. Share success stories that are both inspiring and credible. Clearly acknowledge the hard parts of the energy transition journey. Highlight measurable outcomes – financial, environmental, and reputational – that resonate with peers, investors, and board members alike.
From trade-offs to traction
The environmental and sustainable practices of an organization can be key drivers of brand trust, as our research demonstrates. What C-suites need now is guidance: the tools to manage ambiguity, the frameworks to operationalize intent, and the stories to inspire trust. Our five strategic principles suggest ways of developing an energy transition strategy and can be deployed as a starting point. Leadership in the energy transition requires more than commitment; it demands clarity and competitive foresight.
Authors
Related
Management mythbusters: The AI vs sustainability trade-off
AI and sustainability are transforming the business landscape, yet many organizations treat the two as separate mandates, led by separate teams pulling in different directions. Instead, they must integrate these forces, using...
The energy trilemma: why it pays to get the balance right
Dealing with the conflicting demands of price, sustainability, and security of energy supplies is challenging, but it’s a useful way to assess your firm’s resilience and agility....
Audio available
Spot the difference: ESG and sustainability
ESG assesses risks to the business; sustainability focuses on the business’s impact on the world. Understand the difference to lead with purpose and insight....
Learn Brain Circuits
Join us for daily exercises focusing on issues from team building to developing an actionable sustainability plan to personal development. Go on - they only take five minutes.
Explore Leadership
What makes a great leader? Do you need charisma? How do you inspire your team? Our experts offer actionable insights through first-person narratives, behind-the-scenes interviews and The Help Desk.
Join Membership
Log in here to join in the conversation with the I by IMD community. Your subscription grants you access to the quarterly magazine plus daily articles, videos, podcasts and learning exercises.